Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-09-06
Repeal the Revennn Law.

PALESTINE, Ten, Sept. :, Ia51.
To the Editor o. the Gazette
Noticing the various letters referring
to the recent election and having seen
and talked with many good citizens who
voted pro and anti, [ have concluded
Though | am no pOlitiCian) to make a
few suggestions, IN hopes OF efecting
some good in the direction OF quieting to
some extent, the few who seem still in
clined to agitete the prohibition question.
When great question has been submit
ted to the people, and thoroughly dis
cussed, passed upon by popular vote,
resulting in g decided majority for or
against the measure, Of course the
old time honored rule is, for the
minority to quietly submit 20 the will of
the msjOrity. This, as rule, seems to
be the cage IN reference TO the recent
elections; why not all come to this con-
clusion? 1t is very evident that Texas
is not ready for the adoption CT the pro-
hibition amendment, as ii wss proposed
This is very obvious. And | am Of the
opinion that the pros, or rather the pro-
posed amendment itself, asked tor more
than was necessary. If to close the So
looms was the real object sought, taking
this view of the matter, there could be
no hsrm in allowing cur people to make
all of the wine they wish to make, and
still-up their surplus Of fruit and corn
and barley and rye, wheat, etc.
This must be so for two very important
reasons, one IS that as long IS wines and
liquors are made in the Unlted States, it
Will more or less of i: be bought by citi-
zens OF this state ard shipped in from
states where it is made; as is now the
case, we are not making it here now, but
paying our money to northern distillers
for liquors, who in turn are paying out
quite quantity of it to their farmers for
the grain, fruit, etc, out OF which to
make it, thus giving their own section s
market for the very large amount OF their
productions used in the manufacture
OF liquors, wines, etc, while
under the existing United States
revenue Laws, we are virtually
prohibited from making it ct all-then
would it not be wise for US to make every
move proper, and in reach, to repeal the
United States revenue toX On distilled
spirits, there being more money in the
treasury than is needed; and then it
could be manu- actured here in sufficient
quantities to supply the demand. Our
former distillers made pure whisky in
this stste, and perhaps would do sc
again; and could still all of the peaches and
part OF the corn, and small grain in the
country, which would have tendency to
| increase the amount of corn and small
grain raised here, and proportlonetely
lessen the amount Of cotton. Very
many hogs could be raised and fattened
&In cti eli $hc& 10 ~
using this distilled corn being lost SIS
bteadstuf and food for stock, provided il
1 had not been stilled, would, to some ex-
tent bsregained in the raising and fatten,
ing Of hogs. Now all OF these benefits are
enio4sd by our northern states. l cannot
blame the northern states, only In go is,
as this revenue law is concerned (and
perhaps the adulteration Of their liquors.
or do our people do this part OF ito; and
so far as wine is concerned, our people
do not make enough wine to affect the
temperance Of the country; then manu-
facture the liquors that we use here, and